Silva

Silva v. Di Vittorio

Bad Law
658 F.3d 1090·2011 WL 4436248·2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 19610
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 26, 201108-15620California16,225 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kendall, J.

Opinion by Judge KENDALL; Dissent by Judge O’SCANNLAIN.

*1095 OPINION

Matthew Silva (“Silva”), a Washington State prisoner, appeals the district court’s sua sponte dismissal of his pro se civil rights action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 to review the district court’s order dismissing Silva’s first amended complaint without leave to amend and, for the reasons set forth below, we reverse in part, affirm in part, and remand to the district court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. Specifically, we reverse the district court’s order dismissing Silva’s right to access the courts, retaliation, and state law conversion claims and we affirm the district court’s order dismissing Silva’s RICO claim.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Silva’s Complaint

On September 4, 2007, Silva filed a pro se civil rights complaint against Washington Assistant Attorney General Sara Olson, referred to on appeal as Sara Di Vittorio (“Di Vittorio”), and three Washington Department of Corrections (“WDOC”) and Corrections Corporation of America (“Corrections Corporation”) officials who work at the Florence Correctional Center (“FCC”),…

Dissenting Opinion

O'Scannlain, J.

dissenting:

Matthew Silva, a Washington state prisoner, is no stranger to the federal courts. During his incarceration, he has filed at least fourteen actions in federal district court. He has succeeded in none of them, and at least four of his suits have been dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Undeterred, Silva filed this latest suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights, which too was dismissed for failure to state a claim. Silva now seeks appellate review of that determination.

Throughout his many interactions with the federal courts, Silva has proceeded in forma pauperis (“IFP”). That is, he has never had to prepay a single administrative fee associated with his many federal filings. On appeal, Silva once again seeks to proceed IFP, a privilege which he is now clearly denied under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”). Nevertheless, the court today holds that Silva is free to proceed IFP, and that it should adjudicate the merits of his appeal. Because such conclusion flies in the face of the plain language of the PLRA, I would dismiss this appeal unless Silva prepays the appropriate…

Opinion

Robert M. McKenna, Attorney General, and Andrea Vingo, Assistant Attorney General, Olympia, WA, for the defendant-appellees.

Before: DIARMUID F. O'SCANNLAIN and RICHARD A. PAEZ, Circuit Judges, and VIRGINIA M. KENDALL, [**] District Judge.

Opinion by Judge KENDALL; Dissent by Judge O'SCANNLAIN.

KENDALL, District Judge:

Matthew Silva ("Silva"), a Washington State prisoner, appeals the district court's sua sponte dismissal of his pro se civil rights action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 to review the district court's order dismissing Silva's first amended complaint without leave to amend and, for the reasons set forth below, we reverse in part, affirm in part, and remand to the district court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. Specifically, we reverse the district court's order dismissing Silva's right to access the courts, retaliation, and state law conversion claims and we affirm the district court's order dismissing Silva's RICO claim.

On September 4, 2007, Silva filed a pro se civil rights complaint against Washington Assistant Attorney General Sara Olson, referred to on appeal as Sara Di…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.